My hashrate shows 1,54 on each Fury. There is a hard cap somewhere. Either on the chips, or on the board with a resistor or a bridge somewhere, maybe in the software.
Whatever I change in Ltc clock gives almost the same hashrate.
That reminds me of reading somewhere that going Ltc clock higher than a certain value "voids the warranty"
Something might be capping the value we can use, whatever we are asking. I tester from 450 to 600 Ltc clock with no change either in HW errors or hashrate except some Furys displaying lower hashrate in hashra when the clock is too high.
For now, I suggest using around 8k resistor to have voltage near 1.35. That will use less watts and give extra stable hashrate around 1.5Mh/s until we find how to remove the cap.
Over 520 or 550 Ltc clock might disable some cores and could explain the low hashrate shown by hashra contrôla.I also had higher hashrate with the laptop on windows during the first tests. I'll test when back at home.
Topic: Fury/Blizzard tuning and mods - page 39. (Read 115281 times)
That's correct. 6k resistance, 1.54v, 520mhz.
Now - with Hashra and the version of cgminer it uses I was only getting a reading of around 1.5-1.52Mhs @ nicehash at 520Mhz. Anything above that was just plain buggy. Hashrates would be misreported, etc.
I just finished setting up Minepeon and updating the bfgminer it uses to the 4.2.1 from Darkwinde with the new updates for Zeus chips. At ~20min runtime it is showing 1.634Mhs at 520Mhz.
Both cgminer and bfgminer report around a 4% error rate at the 520Mhz speed.
I'm going to let it run like that for a while as I go do some yardwork. I'll come back after I'm covered in grass clippings and see where it's at. I'm also ordering a killawatt meter...'bout damned time
Now - with Hashra and the version of cgminer it uses I was only getting a reading of around 1.5-1.52Mhs @ nicehash at 520Mhz. Anything above that was just plain buggy. Hashrates would be misreported, etc.
I just finished setting up Minepeon and updating the bfgminer it uses to the 4.2.1 from Darkwinde with the new updates for Zeus chips. At ~20min runtime it is showing 1.634Mhs at 520Mhz.
Both cgminer and bfgminer report around a 4% error rate at the 520Mhz speed.
I'm going to let it run like that for a while as I go do some yardwork. I'll come back after I'm covered in grass clippings and see where it's at. I'm also ordering a killawatt meter...'bout damned time
J4bberwock - what's your hash rate at?
nst6563 - is this summary right? 6k resistor, 1.54v, 520 clk, 1.5mh/s +
Wish you had a way to measure amps or watts.
I'm excited about the mod but with LTC today for example if the gain is 100 kh/s for 50 watts then we'd actually be losing money at 10 cents kWh.
I think your volts (and watts) might be lower than J4bberwock's.
nst6563 - is this summary right? 6k resistor, 1.54v, 520 clk, 1.5mh/s +
Wish you had a way to measure amps or watts.
I'm excited about the mod but with LTC today for example if the gain is 100 kh/s for 50 watts then we'd actually be losing money at 10 cents kWh.
I think your volts (and watts) might be lower than J4bberwock's.
Right now (with Hashra and cgminer) it seems to top out at around 1.5. It also depends on the pool I'm mining at. If I mine at Nicehash, I get a slightly lower hashrate (usually around 1.4-1.5) with a LOT higher number of rejects. If I mine at Manicminer I get nearly 0 rejects and my rate locally shows 1.51mhs-1.52mhs while poolside shows a range of 1.5mhs-1.95mhs (and it stays above 1.5mhs quite a bit).
I found Minepeon which uses bfgminer as it's mining software so I'm getting ready to try that this morning and put the new version of bfgminer from Darkwinde on there. People in that thread at litecointalk were reportedly getting higher hashrates with less errors at lower speeds than we are (something like 1.5-1.6mhs at 340Mhz clock).
I updated the first post with the Minepeon link.
I found Minepeon which uses bfgminer as it's mining software so I'm getting ready to try that this morning and put the new version of bfgminer from Darkwinde on there. People in that thread at litecointalk were reportedly getting higher hashrates with less errors at lower speeds than we are (something like 1.5-1.6mhs at 340Mhz clock).
I updated the first post with the Minepeon link.
Regarding the power draw that everybody have asked.
2 overclocked Zeus mini-blades (Copyright to me
) are currently drawing 200 watt at the wall when idle 400 watt when hashing.
It's 100 watt for each Fury/Blizzard overvolted to 1.65V from 1.26V when hashing
I haven't measured stock power draw.
Next step for me will be to overclock the third mini-blade to 1.8-1.9V, maybe 2v to check for increased power draw and hashrate.
And after the limits are reached on Zeus, move to a new overvolting/overclocking challenge. Unfortunately, A2 is still too expensive for me to buy one simply to play with it.
2 overclocked Zeus mini-blades (Copyright to me
) are currently drawing 200 watt at the wall when idle 400 watt when hashing.It's 100 watt for each Fury/Blizzard overvolted to 1.65V from 1.26V when hashing
I haven't measured stock power draw.
Next step for me will be to overclock the third mini-blade to 1.8-1.9V, maybe 2v to check for increased power draw and hashrate.
And after the limits are reached on Zeus, move to a new overvolting/overclocking challenge. Unfortunately, A2 is still too expensive for me to buy one simply to play with it.
Thanks for the info. Stock is pretty close to 50 watts so it doubles. Looks like both of mine are able to maintain 1.4 mh/s at around 50 watts.
I'm curious to know what hash rate you and nst6563 are getting.
R9 and R11 are swapped on my boards compared to the data from Zeus. the 900R is on the right side on my pictures. And the 9.3k is on the left. You can also see that they were supposed to be around 10k and we have 9k on board. check the markings on your resistor before swapping and use the formula if needed
I figured they must have been swapped on yours. I'll check mine when I take them apart.
Regarding the power draw that everybody have asked.
2 overclocked Zeus mini-blades (Copyright to me ) are currently drawing 200 watt at the wall when idle 400 watt when hashing.
It's 100 watt for each Fury/Blizzard overvolted to 1.65V from 1.26V when hashing
I haven't measured stock power draw.
Next step for me will be to overclock the third mini-blade to 1.8-1.9V, maybe 2v to check for increased power draw and hashrate.
And after the limits are reached on Zeus, move to a new overvolting/overclocking challenge. Unfortunately, A2 is still too expensive for me to buy one simply to play with it.
2 overclocked Zeus mini-blades (Copyright to me
) are currently drawing 200 watt at the wall when idle 400 watt when hashing.It's 100 watt for each Fury/Blizzard overvolted to 1.65V from 1.26V when hashing
I haven't measured stock power draw.
Next step for me will be to overclock the third mini-blade to 1.8-1.9V, maybe 2v to check for increased power draw and hashrate.
And after the limits are reached on Zeus, move to a new overvolting/overclocking challenge. Unfortunately, A2 is still too expensive for me to buy one simply to play with it.
Now that we have schematics, should we refer to these resistors as R10 and R9?
Texas Instruments pdf on top
Zeusminer PDF on bottom
Zeus schematic
J4bberwock - could you please confirm that this looks accurate.
If so we can update the formula to:
R10=0.591xR9/(desired voltage-0.591)
Zeus doc indicates R10=10.5k and R9=10k
We don't know if they have made any changes so maybe best to measure and plug into the formula I think.
TI doc seems to indicate R10 (TI R7) as being the resistor to change. Seems like R9 (TI R8) has additional function - Error Amplifier Compensation - I don't enough about this stuff to know for sure. J4bberwock hope you can help me out here.
It's so great that we have the schematics to refer to now.
Texas Instruments pdf on top
Zeusminer PDF on bottom
Zeus schematic
J4bberwock - could you please confirm that this looks accurate.
If so we can update the formula to:
R10=0.591xR9/(desired voltage-0.591)
Zeus doc indicates R10=10.5k and R9=10k
We don't know if they have made any changes so maybe best to measure and plug into the formula I think.
TI doc seems to indicate R10 (TI R7) as being the resistor to change. Seems like R9 (TI R8) has additional function - Error Amplifier Compensation - I don't enough about this stuff to know for sure. J4bberwock hope you can help me out here.
It's so great that we have the schematics to refer to now.
R9 and R11 are swapped on my boards compared to the data from Zeus. the 900R is on the right side on my pictures. And the 9.3k is on the left. You can also see that they were supposed to be around 10k and we have 9k on board. check the markings on your resistor before swapping and use the formula if needed
So fast. That is why I love crypto currencies. We have the best minds always working and improving at a fast rate.
Here's Darkwinde's newest: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=16301.msg183015#msg183015
Note: --chips-count is now --zeus-cc
--ltc-clk is now --zeus-clk
Note: --chips-count is now --zeus-cc
--ltc-clk is now --zeus-clk
Is there an rpi image like Hashra/Starminer/Minera that supports the bfgminer software and not cgminer (or that supports both)?
Here's Darkwinde's newest: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=16301.msg183015#msg183015
Note: --chips-count is now --zeus-cc
--ltc-clk is now --zeus-clk
Note: --chips-count is now --zeus-cc
--ltc-clk is now --zeus-clk
I know I kept going through the thread and boom another and another. LOL
It rocks though. Soon it will be in the main branch of BFG that will be awesome.
I like the stability and speed increases they are getting.
It rocks though. Soon it will be in the main branch of BFG that will be awesome.
I like the stability and speed increases they are getting.
Newer? Wow...the one I linked to was from today. They're working fast.
Newer? Wow...the one I linked to was from today. They're working fast.
This is more recent: https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=16301.msg182643#msg182643
It gives a little higher hash rate and less HW errors.
Darkwinde also mentioned he will merge the work Jstefanop did and have a new version soon. Maybe this weekend!
It gives a little higher hash rate and less HW errors.
Darkwinde also mentioned he will merge the work Jstefanop did and have a new version soon. Maybe this weekend!
updated first post with link to new bfgminer 4.1.99
https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=16301.5760
Sources:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fygluxm446cjctn/AAAFUAJDeIEYiWnuEefimKjWa
https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=16301.5760
Sources:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fygluxm446cjctn/AAAFUAJDeIEYiWnuEefimKjWa
Now that we have schematics, should we refer to these resistors as R10 and R9?
Texas Instruments pdf on top
Zeusminer PDF on bottom
Zeus schematic
J4bberwock - could you please confirm that this looks accurate.
If so we can update the formula to:
R10=0.591xR9/(desired voltage-0.591)
Zeus doc indicates R10=10.5k and R9=10k
We don't know if they have made any changes so maybe best to measure and plug into the formula I think.
TI doc seems to indicate R10 (TI R7) as being the resistor to change. Seems like R9 (TI R8) has additional function - Error Amplifier Compensation - I don't enough about this stuff to know for sure. J4bberwock hope you can help me out here.
It's so great that we have the schematics to refer to now.
Texas Instruments pdf on top
Zeusminer PDF on bottom
Zeus schematic
J4bberwock - could you please confirm that this looks accurate.
If so we can update the formula to:
R10=0.591xR9/(desired voltage-0.591)
Zeus doc indicates R10=10.5k and R9=10k
We don't know if they have made any changes so maybe best to measure and plug into the formula I think.
TI doc seems to indicate R10 (TI R7) as being the resistor to change. Seems like R9 (TI R8) has additional function - Error Amplifier Compensation - I don't enough about this stuff to know for sure. J4bberwock hope you can help me out here.
It's so great that we have the schematics to refer to now.
Yep...you are correct...
R10 ( Zeus ) is the one to modify...
DON"T TOUCH R9 ...it's part of the Compensation filter as well...could create stability problems...
ZiG
EDIT...:
"Feedback Divider (R7, R8)
Select R8 to be between 10 kΩ and 100 kΩ. For this design, select 20 kΩ. R7 is then selected to produce the
desired output voltage when VFB = 0.591 V using Equation 30
R7 = ( R8 * Vfb ) / ( Vout - Vfb )
VFB = 0.591 V and R8 = 20 kΩ for VOUT = 1.8 V, R7 = 9.78 kΩ, so the value of 9.76 kΩ is selected as the closest standard value.
A slightly lower nominal value increases the nominal output voltage slightly to compensate for some trace impedance at load."
Ti R8 is "Zeus" R9 ...Ti R7 is "Zeus" R10...capisco...
actually it's around 6k now. I adjusted it just slightly. It seemed that with my fury the max I could get with 7k was 500 with less than 4% error. I adjusted the pot down .2k and can now hit 520. Possibly higher, but I won't know with the current version of hashra/cgminer - I'll have to try bfgminer.
Still using 7k resistor value?
J4bberwock & nst6563 are you running them at the same or similar voltage? Any idea of watts (at x volts)?
The voltage mine is reading now is 1.54v (original reading was 1.26v) and I can run it at 520Mhz and stay in the 3%-4% error rate. For whatever reason, it seems that with Hashra it stops displaying the correct hashrate above 520Mhz. I've looked through the code a bit and couldn't really find anything that would limit what it's displaying so I think it may be in whatever version of cgminer it is using. I know in a litecointalk thread Maxzilla (who supports Hashra) asked if he could use the new builds of bfgminer that are being worked on but I haven't had the time to get the files on there and do a manual run of it to see if bfgminer has the same issue with clocks above 520.
As for power usage....I have no idea. A Kilowatt and decent clamp ammeter is something I've been meaning to get for a while now and always end up getting distracted by something else lol
J4bberwock & nst6563 are you running them at the same or similar voltage? Any idea of watts (at x volts)?
Jump to: